All things freshwater: news, analysis, humor, reviews, and commentary from Michael E. 'Aquadoc' Campana, hydrogeologist, hydrophilanthropist, Professor of Hydrogeology and Water Resources Management in the Geography Program of the College of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Sciences (CEOAS) at Oregon State University and Emeritus Professor of Hydrogeology at the University of New Mexico. He is Past President of the American Water Resources Association (AWRA), Past Chair of the Scientists & Engineers Division of the National Ground Water Association (NGWA), Past President of the nonprofit NGWA Foundation and President and Founder the nonprofit Ann Campana Judge Foundation, an organization involved with WaSH (Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene) in Central America. He serves on the Steering Committee of the Global Water Partnership (GWP). CYA statement: with the exception of guest posts, the opinions expressed herein are solely those of Michael E. Campana and not those of CEOAS, Oregon State University, ACJF, AWRA, NGWA, GWP, my spouse Mary Frances, or any other person or organization.

Texas Agriculture Law BlogDon't let the name fool you - there are lots of water issues in agriculture and Tiffany Dowell of Texas A&M University does a fabulous job with this important Internet resource. Give it a read - I do every day!

The Way of WaterDr. Jennifer Veilleux records her fieldwork, research, and thoughts about water resources development and management, indigenous rights, ethics, and a host of other issues.

Thirsty in SuburbiaGayle Leonard documents things from the world of water that make us smile: particularly funny, amusing and weird items on bottled water, water towers, water marketing, recycling, the art-water nexus and working.

This Day in Water HistoryMichael J. 'Mike' McGuire, engineer extraordinaire, NAE member, and author of 'The Chlorine Revolution', blogs about historical happenings in the fields of drinking water and wastewater keyed to calendar dates.

Watershed Moments: Thoughts from the HydrosphereFrom Sarah Boon - rediscovering her writing and editing roots after 13 years, primarily as an environmental scientist. Her writing centres around creative non-fiction, specifically memoir and nature writing. The landscapes of western Canada are her main inspiration.

WaterWiredAll things freshwater: news, comment, publications and analysis from hydrogeologist Michael E. Campana, Professor at Oregon State University and Technical Director of the AWRA.

The 116th Congress, in both its legislative and oversight capacities, has been active in numerous trade policy issues related to renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and its replacement, the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). In May 2017, the Trump Administration sent a 90-day notification to Congress of its intent to begin talks with Canada and Mexico to renegotiate and modernize NAFTA, as required by the 2015 Trade Promotion Authority (TPA). Negotiations officially began on August 16, 2017, and were concluded on September 30, 2018. The USMCA was signed on November 30, 2018. The agreement was approved by the House of Representatives (H.R. 5430) on December 19, 2019, by a vote of 385-41, and by the Senate (S. 3052) on January 16, 2020, by a vote of 89-10. President Trump signed the USMCA implementing legislation on January 29, 2020 (P.L. 116-113). All three parties must ratify the agreement and have regulations and laws in effect to meet their USMCA commitments before the agreement enters into force.

The first NAFTA negotiations were launched in 1992. Implementing legislation was signed on December 8, 1991 (P.L. 103- 182) and NAFTA entered into force on January 1, 1994. It is particularly significant because it was the most comprehensive free trade agreement (FTA) negotiated at the time, contained several groundbreaking provisions, and was the first of a new generation of U.S. FTAs later negotiated. NAFTA established trade liberalization commitments and set new rules and disciplines for future FTAs on issues important to the United States, including intellectual property rights protection, services trade, dispute settlement procedures, investment, labor, and environment. NAFTA’s market-opening provisions gradually eliminated nearly all tariff and most nontariff barriers on merchandise trade. At the time of NAFTA negotiations, average applied U.S. duties on imports from Mexico were 2.07%, while U.S. businesses faced average tariffs of 10%, in addition to nontariff and investment barriers, in Mexico. The U.S.-Canada FTA, which had been in effect since 1989, was suspended under NAFTA. NAFTA will stay in effect until USMCA enters into force.

USMCA, comprised of 34 chapters and 12 side letters, retains most of NAFTA’s market opening measures and other measures, while making notable changes to auto rules of origin, dispute settlement provisions, government procurement, investment, and intellectual property rights (IPR) protection. It also modernizes provisions in services, labor, and the environment. New trade issues, such as digital trade, state-owned enterprises, anticorruption, and currency misalignment, are also addressed. Key issues for Congress in the debate surrounding USMCA included worker rights protection in Mexico, IPR provisions and access to medicine, the enforceability of labor and environmental provisions, as well the constitutional authority of Congress over international trade and its role in revising, approving, or withdrawing from the agreement. Congress was also active in considering U.S. negotiating objectives and the extent to which USMCA made progress in meeting them, as required under TPA.

At least 30 days prior to USMCA’s entry into force, the President must notify Congress that he has determined that the otherparties have taken the necessary legal and regulatory measures to comply with their commitments under the agreement. Such measures include laws or regulations regarding rules of origin, tariffs, panel rosters related to dispute resolution, establishing committees such as the one called for in the chapter on small and medium-sized enterprises, and labor law implementation in Mexico, among others. After all parties have the necessary legal and regulatory measures in place to meet their USMCAcommitments, the agreement will enter into force “on the first day of the third month following the last notification.” The process could take several months or longer. USMCA parties may take as much time as they need to meet their obligations.

I want to reproduce what the report says about the environment (pages 33-35):

Environment

NAFTA was the first U.S. FTA to include a side agreement related to the environment. As with the chapter on labor, environment provisions in U.S. FTAs have evolved significantly over time. The NAFTA side agreement—the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC)—required all parties to enforce their own environmental laws, and contains an

enforcement mechanism applicable to a party’s failure to enforce these laws. NAAEC included a consultation mechanism for addressing disputes with a special dispute settlement procedure. Subsequent FTAs included a similar environmental chapter within the main text of the agreement, including a country’s obligations to enforce their own laws.83

More recent U.S. FTAs added an affirmative obligation for FTA partner countries to adhere to multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) and allowed for environmental disputes under the FTAs to access the main dispute settlement provisions of the agreement. These obligations generally were reflected in the TPA-2015 negotiating objectives. The USMCA environment chapter obligates each party to

 not fail to effectively enforce its environmental laws through a sustained or recurring course of action or inaction to attract trade and investment;

 not waive or derogate from such laws in a manner that weakens or reduces the protections afforded in those law to encourage trade or investment;

 ensure that its environmental laws and policies provide for and encourage high levels of protection;

 strive to improve its levels of environmental protection;

 require parties to adopt and maintain statutes and regulations consistent with

multilateral environmental agreements to which each is a party;

 recognize the sovereign right of each party to establish its own levels of domestic environmental protection, its own regulatory priorities, and to adopt or modify its priorities accordingly;

 acknowledge a party’s right to exercise discretion with regard to enforcement resources;

 provide for the resolution of disputes; and

 provide a mechanism to implement the agreement.

USMCA directly or implicitly addresses obligations under major Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs). It also includes obligations and encouragements to protect the ozone layer, protect the marine environment from ship pollution, encourage conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, encourage sustainable fisheries management and requires the control, reduction, and eventual elimination of subsidies that lead to overfishing or overcapacity. The USMCA does not contain language on climate change.

The Protocol of Amendment to USMCA clarified some of the existing language in the agreement and addressed some perceived shortcoming in the original USMCA text, such as

 Asserting the presumption that an environmental dispute affects trade and investment unless a respondent party can prove otherwise.

 Requiring each party specifically to adopt, maintain, and implement laws, regulations and other measures to fulfill the following MEAs to which they are a party:

 Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES)

 Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer

 International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ship (MARPOL)

 Ramsar Convention on Wetlands

 Convention on Antarctic Marine Living Resources

 International Whaling Convention

 Inter-American Tropical Tuna Convention

The USMCA, as originally signed, only made explicit reference to CITES, MARPOL, and the Montreal Protocol. USMCA implementing legislation will create an Interagency Environment Committee for Monitoring and Enforcement, analogous to the labor chapter, and establishes environment-focused attachés in Mexico City to monitor compliance with the agreement. In addition, the implementing legislation includes measures for authorizing grants under the U.S.- Mexico Border Water Infrastructure Program, the Trade Enforcement Trust Fund and a recapitalization of the North American Development Bank (NADB).

Linkages between trade and environmental protection have long been a concern to some U.S. policymakers and stakeholders. The central question is whether trade liberalization (i.e., the removal of barriers on the free exchange of goods and services between nations) advances shared economic and environmental goals. Some observers argue that economic expansion brought on by trade liberalization adversely impacts the environment. Among other concerns, they contend that for developing countries, international competition may lead them to adopt less stringent environmental standards or to engage in more polluting activities. Thus, they claim that environmental provisions are necessary in trade agreements to help raise or maintain international standards and protect U.S. businesses and workers from perceived unfair competition. Other policy makers and stakeholders believe that trade liberalization and environmental protection are mutually supportive. They argue that while economic growth may adversely impact the environment during the initial stages of industrialization, it can also provide resources to mitigate such effects as countries develop. They also argue that trade liberalization can support U.S. environmental goals through the elimination of tariffs on environmental goods, and the reduction of trade-distorting subsidies.

Trade-related environmental provisions in U.S. FTAs were first introduced in the North American Free Trade Agreement of 1994 (NAFTA). Through the years, they have moved from side agreements to integral chapters within FTA texts, and increasingly have incorporated cooperation and dispute settlement (DS) mechanisms. By executive order in 1999, President Clinton required trade agreements to undergo environmental assessments. In the Trade Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-210), Congress included environmental provisions as a principal negotiating objective in renewing the President’s Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) (previously known as fast-track) legislation. Since then, the United States has been at the forefront of using trade agreements to promote core environmental protections. The structure and use of environmental provisions is currently under debate in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), and in Congress’ consideration of TPA renewal legislation.

Enjoy, or as one of my students would say: 'Knock yourself out.'.

“It’s not true that you never learn from history. You do, but then you forget.” – Martin Wolf

Circle of BlueCircle of Blue uses journalism, scientific research, and conversations from around the world to bring the story of the global freshwater crisis to life. Here you’ll find new water reports, news headlines, and hear from leading scientists.

Drink Water For LifeThe idea is simple. Drink water or other cheap beverages instead of expensive lattes, sodas, and bottled water for a set period of time. A day, a week, a month, Lent, Ramadan, Passover, or some other holiday period.

eFlowNet NewsletterFrom the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) this newsletter has lots of information about environmental flows and related issues.

Sustainable Water Resources RoundtableSince 2002, the Sustainable Water Resources Roundtable (SWRR) has brought together federal, state, corporate, non-profit and academic sectors to advance our understanding of the nation’s water resources and to develop tools for their sustainable management.